Jump to content

woahfraze

HUDDLER
  • Content Count

    354
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

284 Kinda Good

About woahfraze

  • Rank
    Backup

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think expectations need to be tempered. Darnold likely won't match pretty much any of the numbers being tossed around. But that won't mean he isn't the possible solution at QB. It may take a bit of time to fully fix him. As long as he shows marked improvement over the past few years with the Jets--and that's based more on the eye test that what numbers he puts up--then I'll be OK with rolling with him for Year 2 and seeing if that upward trajectory continues. Edit: Marked improvement means he's playing well enough that you think you can win with him. Yes, I understand that a good bi
  2. Also early for me. . Shouldn't say 1st in there. I would edit, but since you've quoted the post, I can't.
  3. Just because multiple teams have inquired/shown interest in potentially trading for Teddy doesn't mean he's going to garner a 2nd or 3rd round pick. If that's what the Panthers ask for, these teams will hang up the phone having done their due diligence because Teddy isn't worth that much. Yes, teams are QB desperate this offseason, but with his contract, the best we can hope for from Teddy is going to be a mid- to late-1st round pick. If he's moved, I'd guess we can get a 4th or 5th for him at best.
  4. Very possible we trade down, but people why are people treating the AJ Bouye signing as having eliminated the need for a CB. He's a reclamation project whose recent play has nowhere close to lived up to his big name. We can't count on him playing like the All Pro he was in 2017, so if the staff feels that a CB is the BPA on the board early in the draft, whether that be at 8 or mid-1st round after a trade, or in the 2nd, they will take that CB.
  5. "A" makes a bit of sense. But if he's shown enough after Year 1 that you feel he could be the real deal even if you're not 100% sure, you can resign him. So I don't understand why you wouldn't see what you have in him after this coming year before making that decision. "B" makes no sense. If he flames out, he's not a competent backup. And even if you want to argue that he's serviceable as a backup, $19MM is way too much to be paying a backup QB. His cap hit absolutely would be prohibitive to trade because all of that amount is guaranteed, but that's a moot point. Because if he flam
  6. I don't have an issue with the Darnold trade itself. For those of you saying it was Option C or D, well what did you want the man to do once the more preferred options didn't work out? This was a modest investment of draft capital for a guy they see upside in. Whether the coaching staff can help him reach his potential is to be seen. But in the context of the trade itself, it's fairly low risk. Where I have a problem with it is picking up his 5th year option. Why commit to $19MM next year when you have no idea if he'll improve or not? Why not wait until after next year to sign him to
  7. I agree with this. Just bite the bullet and move on next offseason. These folks hoping to "recoup" the 2nd from the Darnold trade by moving Teddy are delusional. He doesn't have the same unfulfilled potential of a Darnold or the proven track record of a Stafford. The market may not require us to give up picks to unload his contract, but at most we're getting a late round pick for him. He's more valuable as a backup who knows the system in the event the Darnold trade blows up in our faces.
  8. I'm fine with the trade. I don't understand picking up the 5th year option. Why not play wait and see with how he plays this year? I know it's only an additional year of commitment, but if Darnold is bad, you're not allocating $18.8MM next year for a backup QB/someone you don't want on the roster. If he's good, you can still extend him next year. It might cost them more than $18.8MM in that initial year, but I prefer to take the risk that we have to pay $10MM or so more than otherwise next year if he's good moreso than the risk of having to pay $18.8MM to him next year if he's bad.
  9. This would be a mistake. The only way to restructure the contract would be to push some of the money onto future years of the cap. We want Teddy off the books as soon as possible.
  10. I'm not saying the situation was perfect. Yes, CMC was out. Joe Brady could have made some better calls in the red zone. But the offensive environment surrounding Teddy was far from dire. And a lack of big-bodied redzone threats doesn't explain Teddy's inability to drive us down field at the end of games. He's a risk averse QB and at the end of games when you have to take risks, he utterly crapped the bed because he's either unwilling to take the necessary risks or doesn't have the arm talent to to successfully throw the ball in those risky situations. The sample size is large enough to tell
  11. He was generally OK between the 20s. But he really struggled in the red zone. And at the end of games, on drives where we were either tied with a chance to win or down one score with a chance to come back, he was horrid--0 for 8. It doesn't matter if you can move the ball some of or most of the time. If as QB, you can't get it done when it counts, you aren't it. So he absolutely isn't the answer and absolutely doesn't get less respect than he deserves.
  12. This. If your scouts like Kellen Mond's upside and the coaching staff thinks they can coach him up to his potential, then taking him in Round 2 or 3 doesn't seem like a terrible idea. Obviously it's a risk-reward decision, but the same is true of taking a guy early in Round 1. There's always going to be a downside. I love Zach Wilson as a prospect, but he's not guaranteed to be a great starter in the NFL. Same goes for Trevor Lawrence.
  13. Of all these QBs, I like Wilson the best. I was watching JT O'Sullivan's QB School on YouTube, and you can see the arm strength obviously, but he really excels at throwing with anticipation. Lots of throws where he threw a guy open by releasing the ball before the WR's route broke. And he's got really good footwork and sneaky athleticism. And for all those reasons, he's probably going #2 and will be out or reach unless we trade a boatload to get up to that spot. I like Fields next best. I think the concerns over not being able to make multiple reads is overblown. He can go through p
  14. This is only a one year deal. In what way, shape, or form does this really provide any "insurance" or intent for including Burns in a trade for Watson?
  15. From below, they apparently are only about $5MM over at this point. No idea how they managed that with all the the restructures, but the "voidable" year stuff is probably fairly emblematic of their whole philosophy. Due to cap inflation, it's smart to just continue kicking the can down the road. The only reason it seemed like an acute issue this year is the cap contracted due to lost revenue due to covid. Also from below, you can see with the new TV deals coming up, pushing money into the future, like the Falcons just did with Matt Ryan makes a lot of sense. https://www.theringer
×
×
  • Create New...